Arxiv:2003.14170V1 [Quant-Ph] 31 Mar 2020 Asnmes 36.G 25.V 85.25.Cp 42.50.Dv, 03.67.Bg, Numbers: PACS Array

Home , QIP (complexity)

arXiv:2003.14170v1 [quant-ph] 31 Mar 2020 ASnmes 36.g 25.v 85.25.Cp 42.50.Dv, 03.67.Bg, numbers: PACS array. one-d an four in in arranged distributed qubits) three of sta consisting GHZ group a preparing of feasibility experimental ca the multiple discuss in atoms distributed applie (e.g., etc.) qutrits be qutrits, physical superconducting principle of in types can diﬀerent and using general qubits quite is proposal hi from This decoherence ener thus third and excited the virtually addition, is In operation needed. is be cavities deterministically or prepared qutrits are of states GHZ operation The The cavities. qubits. archite the of coupling the for on way depend the not and network does inter proposal an This as acting creation. level state third the while qubit a representing nthe in prto.TeGZsae fthe of states GHZ The operation. hwta H ttsof states GHZ that show ∗ lcrncades [email protected] address: Electronic rvddta aiisaeiiilyi Greenberger-Horn a in initially are cavities that Provided 2 eeaino unu nage ttso utpegop o groups multiple of states entangled quantum of Generation eateto hsc,Hnzo omlUiest,Hangzh University, Normal Hangzhou Physics, of Department N ogLiu Tong aiis ee qti”rfr oatrelvlqatmsy quantum three-level a to refers “qutrit” Here, cavities. 3 colo hsc,NnigUiest,Nnig209,Chi 210093, Nanjing University, Nanjing Physics, of School 1 iPn Su Qi-Ping , hnroNra nvriy hnro340,China 334001, Shangrao University, Normal Shangrao uisdsrbtdi utpecavities multiple in distributed qubits 1 N unu nomto eerhCenter, Research Information Quantum gopqbt itiue in distributed qubits -group 2 uZhang Yu , N gopqbt r eeae yusing by generated are qubits -group Dtd pi ,2020) 1, April (Dated: Abstract 3 uLagFang Yu-Liang , 1 iis saseiceape efurther we example, speciﬁc a As vities. N hreeg eesi ral suppressed. greatly is levels energy gher mninltasiso ieresonators line transmission imensional entire the during qutrits the of level gy eo orgoptaso uis(each qubits transmon four-group of te -elne GZ nage tt,we state, entangled (GHZ) e-Zeilinger unu os Vcnes various centers, NV dots, quantum , eit tt eesr o h GHZ the for necessary state mediate aiiscnb rae i 3-step a via created be can cavities as omaueeto h states the on measurement no cause tr ftecvt-ae quantum cavity-based the of cture iei needn ftenumber the of independent is time 1 ocet H ttso many of states GHZ create to d n hiPn Yang Chui-Ping and , tmwt h w oetlevels lowest two the with stem u312,Ciaand China 311121, ou N gopqtisplaced qutrits -group na 1 ∗ f I. INTRODUCTION AND MOTIVATION

Large-scale quantum information processing (QIP) has drawn much attention [1-3]. Usu- ally, a large number of qubits may be involved in large-scale QIP. The size of QIP with qubits in multiple cavities can be larger when compared to QIP with qubits in a single cavity. For instance, given the number of qubits in each cavity is m, the number of qubits placed in n cavities is n m, which is n times the number m of qubits placed in a single cavity. × Therefore, large-scale QIP based on cavity or circuit QED may require distributing qubits in different cavities. In such an architecture, quantum state engineering and manipulation may involve not only qubits in the same cavity but also qubits distributed in different cavities [4,5]. The ability to prepare quantum entangled states of qubits located in different cavities and to perform nonlocal quantum operations on qubits in different cavities is a prerequisite to realize large-scale QIP based on cavity or circuit QED [6,7]. Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) entangled states play a key role in quantum communication and QIP. To give just a few examples, QIP [8], quantum communication [9-11], error-correction protocols [12,13], quantum metrology [14], and high-precision spectroscopy [15,16] require entangling quantum systems in a GHZ state. New systems and methods for preparing and measuring GHZ states have therefore been sought intensively for a long time, and remains a very active field of research. To date, GHZ states of 10 or more qubits have been experimentally demonstrated in various systems. For examples, experiments have reported the generation of GHZ states with 14 ionic qubits [17], 20 atomic qubits [18], 12 photonic qubits via a linear optical setup [19], 18 qubits with six photons’ three degrees of freedom [20], and 10 superconducting (SC) qubits coupled to a single microwave resonator [21]. Moreover, GHZ states of 18 SC qubits coupled to a single cavity or resonator has recently been produced in experiments [22] (hereafter, the terms cavity and resonator are used interchangeably). Theoretically, based on cavity or circuit QED, a large number of theoretical methods have been presented for creating multi-qubit GHZ states with various quantum systems (e.g., atoms, quantum dots, SC qutrits, NV centers, etc.), which are placed in a single cavity or coupled to a single resonator [23-31]. Moreover, proposals have been presented to entangle qubits distributed in different cavities [32-42]. Note that the previous methods presented for entangling qubits in a single cavity or resonator may not be applied to entangle qubits that are distributed in different cavities, and the previous

2 proposals for entangling qubits in different cavities are not universal, which depend on the specific cavity-system architecture and the way in which the cavities are connected. Motivated by the above, we present an efficient method to prepare GHZ states of N- group qubits distributed in a N-cavity system. The multi-qubit GHZ states are generated by using qutrits (three-level quantum systems) placed in cavities or embedded in resonators. Here, the two logic states of a qubit are represented by the two lowest levels of a qutrit placed in a cavity, while the third higher energy level of each qutrit is utilized to facilitate the coherent manipulation. By using this proposal, we show that given the initial GHZ state of the cavities is prepared, the N-group qubits can be deterministically prepared in a GHZ state with a 3-step operation only. The procedure for creating the GHZ state of qubits works for a 1D (one-dimensional), 2D, or 3D cavity-based quantum network (Fig. 1). Moreover, it does not depend on in which way the cavities are connected (e.g., via optical fibers or other auxiliary systems). This proposal is quite general and can be used to create GHZ states of multiple groups of qubits, by using natural atoms or artificial atoms (e.g., quantum dots, NV centers, various SC qutrits, etc.) distributed in different cavities. Other advantages of this proposal are: (i) The GHZ state is prepared in a deterministic way because neither measurement on the state of qutrits nor measurement on the state of the cavities is needed; (ii) The GHZ-state preparation time is independent of the number of qubits and thus does not increase with the number of qubits; and (iii) The third level f | i of the qutrits is not occupied during the entire operation, thus decoherence from the higher energy levels of the qutrits is greatly suppressed. As an example, we further discuss the experimental feasibility of the proposal, based on circuit QED. Our numerical simulations show that within current circuit QED technology, it is feasible to produce GHZ states of four groups of SC transmon qubits, each group containing three transmon qubits and the four groups distributed in four one-dimensional transmission line resonators (TLRs) arranged in an array. By increasing the number of resonators, GHZ states of more groups of SC qubits can be created experimentally. This paper is organized as follows. Sec. II introduces basic theory. Sec. III shows how to generate GHZ states of N-group qubits distributed in Ncavities. Sec. IV investigates the experimental feasibility of preparing GHZ states of four-group SC transmon qubits distributed in four TLRs arranged in an array. A concluding summary is given in Sec. V.

3 l ) } l in l and 1) m i − e are the , ..., N | 2 l , m c , ( i ω g | transition of =1 , ..., l l i 0, while highly and ( 2 e , l l > fe 1 l ω c { equires: (i) Cavity ω

͘ ͘ ͘ i↔| g − ͘ ͘ ͘ | Here, fe eraction. transition of qutrit

͘ ͘ ͘ . ω i transition of each of qutrits )] ͘͘͘ e = i ͘͘͘ ͘͘͘ l f ). In the following, we will give F ͘ ͘ ͘ (b) 2D cavity-based quantum net- i↔| short line represents an optical ﬁber nt cavities. In addition, each cavity g | i↔| e | , ..., N 2

͘ ͘ ͘ , qutrits hosted in cavity ͘͘͘ m =1 l ( and detuning ∆ D l l 4 transition of each of qutrits g i

͘ ͘ ͘ f qutrits. The in cavity ͘͘͘ ͘͘͘ i↔| ͘͘͘ e ) each hosting a group of qutrits (Fig. 1). For simplicity, II. BASIC THEORY | } m l

͘ ͘ ͘ . The three levels of each qutrit are denoted as l 1) m − , ..., N 2 E m , ( is dispersively coupled to the and ͘ ͘ ͘ resonantly interacting with the A. Qutrit-cavity dispersive interaction l l , ..., l , ..., with coupling strength l 2 2 , } l l

͘ ͘ ͘ , 1 l cavities (1 1) { − N (ii) Cavity m ( l, , and (iii) A classical pulse resonantly interacting with the l , ..., l 2 (Fig. 2). As shown in the next section, the GHZ state preparation r Consider Suppose that cavity , l i 1 f dispersively interacting with the work. (c) 3D cavity-based quantum network.or In (a,b,c), other each auxiliary system, which isis used a to 1D couple or two 3D adjace cavity, hosting one group of qutrits (red dots). FIG. 1: (color online) (a) 1D cavity-based quantum network. cavity are labelled as 1 in cavity a brief introduction to the state evolution under these types of int assume that each group contains | detuned (decoupled) from other energy level transitions [Fig. 2(a each of qutrits { f f 'l

gl e e f

e :l

gr, l g g g (a) (b) (c)

FIG. 2: (color online) (a) Illustration of the dispersive interaction between cavity l and the e f | i ↔ | i transition of qutrits 1l, 2l, ..., (m 1) , with coupling constant gl and detuning ∆l = ωfe ωc > 0. { − l} − l Here, ωfe is the e f transition frequency of the qutrits and ωc is the frequency of cavity l. (b) | i ↔ | i l Illustration of the resonant interaction between cavity l and the g e transition of qutrit ml | i ↔ | i with coupling constant gr,l. (c) Illustration of the resonant interaction between a classical pulse and the g e transition of qutrits 1l, 2l, ..., (m 1) in cavity l. Note that the level structures in | i ↔ | i { − l} (a), (b), and (c) are diﬀerent. The level spacings of qutrits in (a) are adjusted such that e f | i ↔ | i transition is dispersively coupled to cavity l. The level spacings in (b) are adjusted such that the g e transition is resonant with cavity l. The level spacings in (c) are adjusted such that | i ↔ | i qutrits are decoupled from cavity l during the pulse. A blue double-arrow vertical line in (a) and (b) represents the frequency of cavity l, while a blue double-arrow vertical line in (c) represents the pulse frequency. e f transition frequency of each qutrit and the frequency of cavity l, respectively. This | i↔| i condition can be met by prior adjustment of the qutrit’s level spacings or the frequency of cavity l. For instance, the level spacings of superconducting qutrits can be rapidly (within 1 3 ns) tuned [43,44]; the level spacings of NV centers can be readily adjusted by changing ∼ the external magnetic ﬁeld applied along the crystalline axis of each NV center [45,46]; and the level spacings of atoms/quantum dots can be adjusted by changing the voltage on the electrodes around each atom/quantum dot [47]. In addition, the frequency for an optical cavity can be changed in experiments [48], and the frequency of a microwave cavity can be rapidly adjusted with a few nanoseconds [49,50].

5 Under the above assumptions, the Hamiltonian of the whole system in the interaction picture and after the rotating wave approximation (RWA) is given by (assuming ~ = 1)

N i∆lt + H1 = gle aˆlSfe,l + H.c., (1) l X=1 m 1 where S+ = − f e , anda ˆ is the photon annihilation operator of the cavity l (l = fe,l jl l j=1 | i h | 1, 2, ..., N). InP Eq. (1), we assume that the coupling strength gl between cavity l and the e f transition is the same for all of qutrits 1 , 2 , ..., (m 1) . | i↔| i { l l − l} Under the large detuning condition ∆ g (l =1, 2, ..., N), we can obtain the following l ≫ l eﬀective Hamiltonian [51–53]

N m 1 − + + Heff = λl Sf,laˆlaˆ Se,laˆ aˆl + f e e f (2) l − l | ijl h |⊗| ikl h | l=1 j,k=1;j=k ! X X6 m 1 m 1 where S = − f f , S = − e e , and λ = g2/∆ . Here, the first (second) term f,l jl e,l jl l l l j=1 | i h | j=1 | i h | is an ac-StarkP shift of the level fP( e ) induced by cavity l. The last term represents the | i | i “dipole” coupling between the jth and the kth qutrits in cavity l, mediated by cavity l. When the level f of each qutrit is not occupied, the Hamiltonian (2) reduces to | i N H = λ S aˆ+aˆ . (3) eff − l e,l l l l X=1 Under this Hamiltonian, one can easily find that the following state evolution

g 0 g 0 | ijl | icl | ijl | icl e 0 e 0 | ijl | icl | ijl | icl . (4) g 1 → g 1 | ijl | icl | ijl | icl e 1 eiλlt e 1 | ijl | icl | ijl | icl applies to each of qutrits 1 , 2 , ..., (m 1) in cavity l simultaneously (l = 1, 2, ..., N). { l l − l} Note that the subscript j involved in Eq. (4) is 1 , 2 , ...,or (m 1) (l =1, 2, ..., N). l l l − l B. Qutrit-cavity resonant interaction

Consider that cavity l is resonant with the g e transition of qutrit m (l =1, 2, ..., N) | i↔| i l [Fig. 2(b)]. The Hamiltonian in the interaction picture and after the RWA is given by

H2 = gr,laˆl e g + H.c., (5) | iml h | 6 where g is the resonant coupling constant of cavity l with the g e transition of qutrit r,l | i↔| i ml. Under this Hamiltonian, we can obtain the state evolution

g 1 cos gr,lt g 1 i sin gr,lt e 0 , (6) | iml | icl → | iml | icl − | iml | icl while the state g 0 remains unchanged. | iml | icl C. Qutrit-pulse resonant interaction

Assume that a classical pulse is resonant with the g e transition of each of qutrits | i↔| i 1 , 2 , ..., (m 1) in cavity l [Fig. 2(c)]. The Hamiltonian in the interaction picture and { l l − l} after making the RWA is given by

iφ + H3 = Ωle− Seg,l + H.c., (7)

m 1 where S+ = − e g , φ is the pulse initial phase and Ω is the pulse Rabi frequency. eg,l jl l j=1 | i h | Under this Hamiltonian,P we can easily obtain the following state rotation

iφ g cos Ωlt 0 ie− sin Ωlt 1 , | ijl → | i − | i iφ e ie sin Ωlt 0 + cos Ωlt 1 , (8) | ijl → − | i | i for qutrit j (j =1, 2, ..., m 1). l − The results (4), (6) and (8) will be applied for the GHZ state preparation, as shown in the next section.

III. PREPARATION OF GHZ STATES OF N-GROUP QUBITS IN N CAVITIES

Assume that the N cavities are initially prepared in a GHZ state α 0 0 ... 0 + | ic1 | ic2 | icN 2 2 β 1 1 ... 1 ( α + β = 1,α = 0, β = 0). In addition, assume that qutrit ml in | ic1 | ic2 | icN | | | | 6 6 cavity l is in the state g while each of the remaining qutrits 1 , 2 , ..., (m 1) in cavity l | i { l l − l} is in the state 1 ( g + e ), which can be prepared by applying a classical π pulse resonant √2 | i | i with the g e transition of the qutrits each initially in the state g . Hereafter, deﬁne | i↔| i | i = 1 ( g e ) . The initial state of the whole system is thus given by |±i √2 | i±| i α 0 0 ... 0 + β 1 1 ... 1 | ic1 | ic2 | icN | ic1 | ic2 | icN m 1 m 1 m 1 − − − + + ... + g g ... g , (9) ⊗ | ij1 | ij2 | ijN ⊗| im1 | im2 | imN j=1 j=1 j=1 Y Y Y 7 W1 W 2 W 3

W W a W a a W a (a) (b) (c)

FIG. 3: (color online) (a) Sequence of operations for step 1. (b) Sequence of operations for step 2.

τ3 is the qutrit-pulse interaction time, as described in the text. In addition, τa is the typical time required to adjust the qutrit level spacings. Note that the operation sequence in (a)-(c) follows from left to right.

where the subscripts j1, j2, ..., jN represent the jth qutrit in cavity 1, cavity 2, ..., cavity N respectively; and m1, m2, ...mN represent the m-th qutrit (i.e., qutrit m) in cavity 1, cavity 2, ..., cavity N respectively. All qutrits are initially decoupled from their respective cavities. The procedure for preparing the N-group qubits in a GHZ state is listed below:

Step 1. Keep qutrit ml decoupled from cavity l but adjust the level spacing of qutrits 1 , 2 , ..., (m 1) in cavity l to obtain an eﬀective Hamiltonian described by Eq. (3). { l l − l} According to Eq. (4), the state (9) evolves as follows

m 1 m 1 m 1 − − − α 0 0 ... 0 + + ... + | ic1 | ic2 | icN ⊗ | ij1 | ij2 | ijN " j=1 j=1 j=1 Y Y Y m 1 g + eiλ1t e m 1 g + eiλ2t e m 1 g + eiλN t e − j1 j1 − j2 j2 − jN jN +β 1 1 ... 1 | i | i | i | i ... | i | i | ic1 | ic2 | icN √ √ √  j=1 2 j=1 2 j=1 2 Y Y Y g g ... g . (10) ⊗| im1 | im2 | imN

By setting λ1 = λ2 = ... = λN = λ and for t = τ1 = π/λ, the state (10) becomes m 1 m 1 m 1 − − − α 0 0 ... 0 + + ... + | ic1 | ic2 | icN ⊗ | ij1 | ij2 | ijN j=1 j=1 j=1 Y Y Y m 1 m 1 m 1 − − − +β 1 1 ... 1 ... | ic1 | ic2 | icN |−ij1 |−ij2 |−ijN j=1 j=1 j=1 ! Y Y Y g g ... g . (11) ⊗| im1 | im2 | imN 8 Then, adjust the level spacings of qutrits 1 , 2 , ..., (m 1) such that they are decoupled { l l − l} from cavity l. The operation sequence for this step of operation is illustrated in Fig. 3(a). Step 2. Adjust the level spacing of qutrit m in cavity l such that the g e transition l | i↔| i of qutrit ml is resonant with cavity l (with a resonant coupling constant gr,l). After an interaction time τ2 = π/ (2gr,l), we have 1 g i 0 e according to Eq. (6). | icl | iml → − | icl | iml Thus, the state (11) becomes

m 1 m 1 m 1 − − − α + + ... + g g ... g | ij1 | ij2 | ijN ⊗| im1 | im2 | imN j=1 j=1 j=1 Y Y Y m 1 m 1 m 1 − − − +( i)N β ... e e ... e − |−ij1 |−ij2 |−ijN ⊗| im1 | im2 | imN j=1 j=1 j=1 ! Y Y Y 0 0 ... 0 . (12) ⊗| ic1 | ic2 | icN

To maintain the state (12), one should adjust the level spacing of qutrit ml such that it is decoupled from cavity l. The operation sequence for this step of operation is illustrated in Fig. 3(b). Step 3. Apply a classical π pulse (with an initial phase π/2) to qutrit j (j =1, 2, ..., m 1). l − The pulse is resonant with the g e transition of qutrit j for a duration time τ = | i↔| i l 3 π/ (2Ωl) , resulting in + g and e according to Eq. (8). The state (12) | ijl →| ijl |−ijl →−| ijl thus becomes

m m m m m m α g g ... g + eiφβ e e ... e , (13) | ij1 | ij2 | ijN | ij1 | ij2 | ijN j=1 j=1 j=1 j=1 j=1 j=1 Y Y Y Y Y Y where φ =(m 3/2) Nπ. This state is a GHZ entangled state for the N-group qubits in the − N cavities, with the two logic states of a qubit being represented by the two lowest levels g and e of a qutrit. For α = β = 1/√2, the state (13) is a standard GHZ state with | i | i | | | | maximal entanglement. The operation sequence for this step of operation is illustrated in Fig. 3(c).

In above, we have set λ1 = λ2 = ... = λN , which turns out into g2 g2 g2 1 = 2 = ... = N . (14) ∆1 ∆2 ∆N This condition (14) can be readily met by adjusting the qutrits’ positions in the cavities, the qutrits’ level spacings [43-47] or the cavity frequencies [48-50]. From the above description, one can see:

9 (i) Because the same detuning ∆ is set for each of qutrits 1 , 2 , ..., (m 1) in cavity l l l − l l (l = 1, 2, ..., N), the level spacings for qutrits 1 , 2 , ..., (m 1) can be synchronously l l − l adjusted, e.g., via changing the common external parameters. (ii) During the entire operation, the level f for all qutrits in each cavity is not occupied. | i Thus, decoherence due to energy relaxation and dephasing of this higher energy level is greatly suppressed.

(iii) Assume that both gr,1,gr,2, ..., gr,N and Ω1, Ω2, ..., ΩN are non-identical for diﬀerent cavities. Thus, the total operation time is π π π π π π top = π/λ + max , , ..., + max , , ..., +4τd, (15) {2gr,1 2gr,2 2gr,N } {2Ω1 2Ω2 2ΩN } which is independent of the number of qubits and thus does not increase with the number of

qubits. Note that τd is the typical time required for adjusting the level spacings of qutrits. (iv) This proposal does not require measurement on the state of the qutrits or the cavities. Thus, the GHZ state is created deterministically. (v) The above operations have nothing to do with the manner in which the cavities are connected. In this sense, the method presented here can be applied to create GHZ states of the qubits distributed in a 1D, 2D, or 3D cavity-based quantum network (Fig. 1), where the cavities can be connected with optical ﬁbers or other auxiliary systems. (vi) When the N cavities are initially prepared in another type of symmetrical GHZ state α 0 0 ... 0 1 1 ... 1 + β 1 1 ... 1 0 0 ... 0 , it is | ic1 | ic2 | ics | ics+1 | ics+2 | icN | ic1 | ic2 | ics | ics+1 | ics+2 | icN straightforward to show that by following the procedure described above, the N-group qubits distributed in N cavities will be prepared in the following GHZ state

m m m m m m α g g ... g e e ... e | ij1 | ij2 | ijs | ijs+1 | ijs+2 | ijN j=1 j=1 j=1 j=1 j=1 j=1 Ym Ym Ym Ym Ym Ym +β e e ... e g g ... g . (16) | ij1 | ij2 | ijs | ijs+1 | ijs+2 | ijN j=1 j=1 j=1 j=1 j=1 j=1 Y Y Y Y Y Y (vii) The procedure described above can also be applied to create GHZ state of N − group qubits distributed in N cavities in the case when the number of qutrits in each group is different. As a matter of fact, the condition (14) is unnecessary. For the case of λ = λ = 1 6 2 6 ... = λ , the state (11) resulting from the operation of step 1 described above cannot 6 N be achieved by turning on/off the effective couplings of the qutrits with the N cavities

10 simultaneously. However, this state (11) can be obtained by modifying the operation of step 1 as follows. First, switch on the effective dispersive interaction of the qutrits 1 , 2 , ..., (m 1) with cavity l at a proper time τ = t t , by tuning the frequency of { l l − l} l max − l the qutrits 1 , 2 , ..., (m 1) or the frequency of cavity l to have the proper ∆ , where t { l l − l} l max = max π/ (2λ ) ,π/ (2λ ) , ..., π/ (2λ ) and t = π/ (2λ ). Then, switch off all the effective { 1 2 N } l l interactions of the qutrits with the N cavities at the time tmax, by tuning the frequency of the qutrits or the frequency of the N cavities such that the qutrits are decoupled from the N cavities.

In the above discussion, we have assumed that the coupling strength gl is identical for all of qutrits 1 , 2 , ..., (m 1) in cavity l (l = 1, 2, ..., N). For the case of g varying { l l − l} l with different qutrits in cavity l, this proposal is still valid as long as the large detuning condition holds for individual qutrits, but the procedure may become more complex because one will need to adjust the frequencies of individual qutrits separately. Therefore, to simplify the experiments, it is strongly suggested to design the sample with identical qutrit-cavity coupling strength for qutrits in the same cavity. To prepare the cavities in the GHZ state, two key ingredients are required. One is the coupling between neighbor cavities. For optical cavities, this can be obtained by using optical fibers to connect the neighbor cavities. In addition, for microwave cavities or resonators, this can be achieved by using solid-state auxiliary systems (e.g., superconducting qubits/qutrits, quantum dots, or NV centers) to connect the neighbor cavities. The other is decoupling of the intra-cavity atoms with the cavities. This can be realized by adjusting the level spacings of the atoms or the frequencies of the cavities such that the cavities are highly detuned (decoupled) from the transitions between any two levels of the atoms. As discussed previously, both level spacings of natural or artificial atoms and cavity frequencies can be adjusted in experiments [43-50].

IV. POSSIBLE EXPERIMENTAL IMPLEMENTATION

In above, a general type of qubit is considered and a qubit is formed by the two lowest levels of a qutrit. Circuit QED consists of microwave cavities and superconducting (SC) qubits, which is an analogue of cavity QED and has been considered as one of the leading candidates for QIP [54-60]. As an example, let us consider a setup, which consists of four TLRs, each hosting three SC transmon qutrits, connected through the coupler SC transmon

11 T T T & & & & & &

FIG. 4: (color online) 1D quantum network consisting of four one-dimensional transmission line resonators (TLRs) arranged in an array. Each TLR hosts three SC transmon qutrits (red dots),

and adjacent TLRs are coupled through SC transmon qutrits (q1,q2,q3).

qutrits (q1, q2, q3), and arranged in an array (Fig. 4). The three SC transmon qutrits placed in cavity l are labelled as 1l, 2l, and 3l (l = 1, 2, 3, 4). In the following, we will give a discussion on the experimental feasibility of preparing a GHZ state of the four-group SC transmon qubits distributed in the four TLRs (Fig. 4). Let us first give some explanation on transmon qutrits and transmon qubits. A transmon qutrit has a ladder-type three level structure as shown in Fig. 2, while a transmon qubit considered here is formed by the two lowest levels g and e of a transmon qutrit. In | i | i other words, when the third level f of a transmon qutrit is dropped off (Fig. 2), the | i transmon qutrit reduces to a transmon qubit. As is well known, a transom qubit is an artificial two-level atom, whose Hamiltonian takes the same form as the Hamiltonian of a natural two-level atom, i.e., H = ω0σz, where ω0 is the transition frequency of the atom, and σ = e e g g is the Pauli operator. Based on the discussion here, one can see that the z | ih |−| ih | three tranmon qutrits (red dots in Fig. 4) placed in a TLR correspond to three transmon qubits (i.e., one group of qubits). Thus, the four groups of transmon qutrits placed in the four TLRs correspond to the four groups of SC transmon qubits. For convenience, in the following we will use the terms “cavity” and “resonator” interchangeably. From the description given in the previous section, one can see that three basic interactions are used in the preparation of the GHZ states, i.e., the three basic interactions described by the Hamiltonians H1,H2, and H3 described above. With the unwanted interaction and the inter-cavity crosstalk being considered, these Hamiltonians are modified as follows:

(i) H1′ = H1 + δH1 + ε, where δH1 describes the unwanted interaction of cavity l with the g e transition of qutrits 1 , 2 in cavity l (l = 1, 2, 3, 4) [Fig. 5(a)]. The expression | i↔| i { l l}

12 ' p f f ~ 'l :l g l 'r f e e ~ ~ gr, l 'l e :l ~ gl gr, l g g g (a) (b) (c)

FIG. 5: (color online) (a) Dispersive interaction between cavity l and the e f transition of | i ↔ | i qutrits 1l, 2l with coupling strength gl and detuning ∆l = ωfe ωc > 0, as well as the unwanted { } − l off-resonant interaction between cavity l and the g e transition of qutrits 1l, 2l with coupling | i ↔ | i { } strength gl and detuning ∆l = ωeg ωc > 0. (b) Resonant interaction between cavity l and the − l g e transition of qutrit 3l with coupling constant gr,l, as well as the unwanted off-resonant | i ↔ | ie e interaction between cavity l and the e f transition of qutrit 3l with coupling constant gr,l | i ↔ | i and detuning ∆r,l. (c) Resonant interaction between a classical pulse and the g e transition | i ↔ | i e of qutrits 1l, 2l with Rabi frequency Ωl, as well as the unwanted off-resonant interaction between { } the pulse and the e f transition of qutrits 1l, 2l with Rabi frequency Ωl and detuning | i ↔ | i { } ∆p = ωfe ωp. Here, ωp is the pulse frequency. − e of δH1 is given by 4 e i∆lt + δH1 = gle aˆlSeg,l + H.c., (17) l X=1 2 e where S+ = e g , g is the coupling strength between cavity l and the g e eg,l jl l j=1 | i h | | i↔| i transition of qutritsP 1 , 2 , and ∆ = ω ω is the detuning between the frequency of { l l}e l eg − cl cavity l and the g e transition frequency of qutrits 1 , 2 . In addition, ε describes | i↔| i e { l l} the inter-cavity crosstalk between the adjacent cavities, which is given by

i∆12t + i∆23t + i∆34t + ε = g12e aˆ1 aˆ2 + g23e aˆ2 aˆ3 + g34e aˆ3 aˆ4 + H.c., (18) where ∆ = ω ω = ∆ ∆ (j =1, 2, 3), g is the crosstalk strength between j(j+1) cj − cj+1 j+1 − j j(j+1) the two neighbor cavities j and j +1(j =1, 2, 3). Note that when compared to the crosstalk

13 between the adjacent cavities, the crosstalk between non-adjacent cavities (i.e., cavities 1 and 3, cavities 1 and 4, and cavities 2 and 4) are negligible.

(ii) H2′ = H2 + δH2 + ε, where δH2 describes the unwanted interaction between cavity l and the e f transition of qutrit 3 in cavity l (l =1, 2, 3, 4) [Fig. 5(b)]. The expression | i↔| i l of δH2 is given by

i∆r,lt δH2 = gr,le aˆl f e + H.c. (19) | i3l h | where g is the oﬀ-resonant coupling strength between cavity l and the e f transition r e | i↔| i

of qutrit 3l in cavity l, and ∆r,l = ωfe ωcl is the detuning between the frequency of cavity e − l and the e f transition frequency of qutrit 3 . | i↔| i l (iii) H3 = H3 + δH3 + ε, where δH3 describes the unwanted interaction between the pulse and the e f transition of 1 , 2 (l = 1, 2, 3, 4) [Fig. 5(c)]. The expression of δH is e| i↔| i { l l} 3 given by

iφ i∆pt + δH3 = Ωle− e− Sfe,l + H.c. (20) 2 where S+ = f e , Ω is thee pulse Rabi frequency associated with the e f fe,l jl l j=1 | i h | | i↔| i transition of theP qutrits, and ∆p = ωfe ωp = ωfe ωeg is the detuning between the pulse e − − frequency ω and the e f transition frequency of the qutrits. p | i↔| i It should be mentioned that the g f transition induced by the pulse or the cavities | i↔| i is negligible because ω ,ω ω (Fig. 2). For simplicity, we also assume that the eﬀect of eg fe ≪ fg the qutrit decoherence and the cavity decay during the adjustment of the qutrit level spacings is negligible because for transmon qutrits the level spacings can be rapidly adjusted. After taking into account the qutrit decoherence and the cavity decay, the system dynamics, under the Markovian approximation, is determined by the master equation

dρ 4 = i [H′ , ρ]+ κ [ˆa ]+ dt − k lL l l=1 4 3 X 4 3 4 3

+γeg σ− + γfe σ− + γfg σ− L eg,jl L fe,jl L fg,jl l j=1 l j=1 l j=1 X=1 X X=1 X X=1 X 4 3 +γ (σ ρσ σ ρ/2 ρσ /2) ϕ,e ee,jl ee,jl − ee,jl − ee,jl l j=1 X=1 X 4 3 +γ (σ ρσ σ ρ/2 ρσ /2) , (21) ϕ,f ff,jl ff,jl − ff,jl − ff,jl l j=1 X=1 X

where Hk′ (with k = 1, 2, 3) are the modiﬁed Hamiltonians H1′ , H2′ , and H3′ given above,

14 + + + [Λ] = ΛρΛ Λ Λρ/2 ρΛ Λ/2 (with Λ =a ˆl, , σ− , σ− , σ− ), σ− = e f , L − − fe,jl eg,jl fg,jl fe,jl | ijl h | σ− = g e , σ− = g f , σee,j = e e , and σff,j = f f . In addition, κl is eg,jl | ijl h | fg,jl | ijl h | l | ijl h | l | ijl h | the decay rate of cavity l; γ is the energy relaxation rate for the level e associated with eg | i the decay path e g ; γ (γ ) is the relaxation rate for the level f related to the | i→| i fe fg | i decay path f e ( f g ); γ (γ ) is the dephasing rate of the level e ( f ). | i→| i | i→| i ϕ,e ϕ,f | i | i The fidelity of the operation is given by = ψ ρ ψ , where ψ is the ideal output F h id| | idi | idi state given by p m 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 g g e e + e e g g 0 , (22) √ | ij1 | ij2 | ij3 | ij4 | ij1 | ij2 | ij3 | ij4 ⊗ | icl 2 j=1 j=1 j=1 j=1 j=1 j=1 j=1 j=1 ! l Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y=1 when the four TLRs are initially in the GHZ state 1 0 0 1 1 + 1 1 0 0 (see the appendix for the details of preparing √2 | ic1 | ic2 | ic3 | ic4 | ic1 | ic2 | ic3 | ic4 the four TLRs in this GHZ state), while ρ is the final density matrix obtained by numerically solving the master equation. We now numerically calculate the fidelity. For a transmon qutrit, the level spacing an- harmonicity 100 720 MHz was reported in experiments [61]. As an example, consider ∼ ∆ /2π = ∆ /2π = ∆ ∆ /2π = 0.7 GHz. By choosing ∆ /2π = ∆ /2π = 100 r,l p − l − l − 1 3 MHz and ∆ /2π = ∆ /2π = 80 MHz, we have ∆ /2π = 20 MHz, ∆ /2π = 20 MHz, 2 4 e 12 − 23 and ∆ /2π = 20 MHz. With the choice of ∆ , ∆ , ∆ , ∆ here, one has g = g = 4 g 34 − 1 2 3 4 2 4 5 1 and g3 = g1 according to Eq. (14). For transmon qutrits [62], gl = gl/√2, gr,l = √q2gr,l,

Ωl = √2Ωl. For simplicity, we assume gr,l = gl. In addition, we choose g12,g23,g34 = e e 0.01 max g1,g2,g3 , which is achievable in experiments by a prior design of the sample e { } e with appropriate capacitances c11,c12,c22,c23,c33,c34 [63]. Other parameters used in the nu- 1 1 1 1 1 merical simulation are: (i) γeg− = 60 µs, γfg− = 150 µs [64], γfe− = 30 µs, γφ,e− = γφ,f− = 20 µs,

(ii) Ωl/2π = 45 MHz. Here, we consider a rather conservative case for decoherence time of the transmon qutrit [65,66]. For simplicity, we assume κl = κ in our numerical simulation (l =1, 2, 3, 4). 1 By numerically solving the master equation (21), we plot Fig. 6 for κ− = 10 µs, which shows the ﬁdelity versus g . From Fig. 6, one can see that for g /2π 14.15 MHz, a 1 1 ∼ high ﬁdelity 90% can be obtained. For the value of g here, g /2π,g /2π 12.65 MHz; ∼ 1 2 4 ∼ g 14.15 MHz; g /2π,g /2π 10 MHz; and g /2π,g /2π = 8.95 MHz, which are 3 ∼ r,1 r,3 ∼ r,2 r,4 readily available in experiments because a coupling strength g/2π 360 MHz has been ∼ reported for a transmon qutrit coupled to a TLR [67,68].

15 1.0

0.9

0.8 ℱ 0.7

0.6

0.5 10 15 20

g1/2 (MHz)

FIG. 6: (color online) Fidelity versus g1. The parameters used in the numerical simulation are referred to the text

0.91

0.90 ℱ

0.89

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 (μs)

1 FIG. 7: (color online) Fidelity versus κ− for g1/2π = 14.15 MHz and Ωl/2π = 45 MHz. Other parameters used in the numerical simulation are the same as those used in Fig. 6.

To see how the fidelity changes with the cavity decay rate, we plot Fig. 7, which shows 1 the fidelity versus κ− for g1/2π = 14.15 MHz and Ωl/2π = 45 MHz. Fig. 7 demonstrates 1 that the fidelity strongly depends on the photon lifetime of the cavities. For κ− = 20 µs, a

16 high fidelity > 90% can be achieved. We remark that the fidelity can be further increased by improving the system parameters. The operation time is 0.27 µs, which is much shorter than the decoherence times of ∼ transmon qutrits used in our numerical simulations. For a transmon qutrit, the typical transition frequency between two neighbor levels is 1 20 GHz. As an example, we consider − ω /2π 6.7 GHz and ω /2π 6.0 GHz for the case of the transmon qutrits being eg ∼ fe ∼ dispersively coupled to their cavities. Thus, for the values of ∆1, ∆2, ∆3, ∆4 chosen above, one has ωc1 /2π = ωc3 /2π = 6.6 GHz and ωc2 /2π = ωc4 /2π = 6.62 GHz. For the cavity 1 frequencies here and κ− = 10 µs, the quality factors of the four cavities are Q , Q 1 3 ∼ 4.14 105 and Q , Q 4.16 105, which are available because TLRs with a loaded quality × 2 4 ∼ × factor Q 106 have been experimentally demonstrated [69,70]. The analysis given above ∼ shows that high-fidelity creation of GHZ states of four-group SC qubits distributed in four cavities is feasible with the present circuit QED technology. Further investigation on the experimental feasibility of creating GHZ states of more qubits distributed in different cavities would be necessary. However, we note that the numerical simulations become rather lengthy and complex as the number of qubits increases, which is beyond the scope of this theoretical work.

V. CONCLUSION

We have presented an approach to generate Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) entangled states of multiple groups of qubits distributed in multiple cavities. From the above description, one can see that as long as the cavities are initially prepared in a GHZ state, all qubits in the cavities can be entangled via a 3-step operation only, no matter what type of architecture the cavity-based quantum network preserves and in which way the cavities are coupled. This proposal also has some additional advantages stated in the introduction. Our numerical simulation shows that high-ﬁdelity preparation of GHZ states of four-group SC qubits, each group containing three qubits and the four groups distributed in four cavities, is feasible with current circuit QED technology. By increasing the number of resonators, GHZ states of more groups of SC qubits distributed in multiple cavities can be created. This work opens a way for quantum state engineering with many qubits distributed in diﬀerent cavity nodes of a quantum network. We wish that it will stimulate experimental activities in the near future.

17 As a ﬁnal note, it should be stressed that this proposal is based on the prerequisite that the cavities are initially prepared in a GHZ state. Nevertheless, this work is of interest, because it may be easy to entangle the cavities when compared to directly entangle a large number of qubits distributed in diﬀerent cavities without aid of the cavity initial GHZ states and because the proposal works for a 1D, 2D, or 3D quantum network composed of cavities.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was partly supported by the Key R&D Program of Guangdong province (2018B030326001), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) (11074062, 11374083, 11774076), the NKRDP of China (2016YFA0301802), and the Jiangxi Natural Science Foundation (20192ACBL20051).

[1] S. Seidelin, J. Chiaverini, R. Reichle, J. J. Bollinger, D. Leibfried, J. Britton, J. H. Wesenberg, R. B. Blakestad, R. J. Epstein, D. B. Hume, W. M. Itano, J. D. Jost, C. Langer, R. Ozeri, N. Shiga, and D. J. Wineland, Microfabricated surface-electrode ion trap for scalable quantum information processing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 253003 (2006). [2] K. Nemoto, M. Trupke, S. J. Devitt, A. M. Stephens, B. Scharfenberger, K. Buczak, T. N¨obauer, M. S. Everitt, J. Schmiedmayer, and W. J. Munro, Photonic Architecture for Scal- able Quantum Information Processing in Diamond, Phys. Rev. X 4, 031022 (2014). [3] X. Qiang, X. Zhou, J. Wang, C. M. Wilkes, T. Loke, S. O’Gara, L. Kling, G. D. Marshall, R. Santagati, T. C. Ralph, J. B. Wang, J. L. O’Brien, M. G. Thompson, and J. C. F. Matthews, Large-scale silicon quantum photonics implementing arbitrary two-qubit processing, Nature Photonics 12, 534 (2018). [4] C. P. Yang, Q. P. Su, S. B. Zheng, and S. Han, Generating entanglement between microwave photons and qubits in multiple cavities coupled by a superconducting qutrit, Phys. Rev. A 87, 022320 (2013). [5] M. Mariantoni, F. Deppe, A. Marx, R. Gross, F. K. Wilhelm, and E. Solano, Two-resonator circuit quantum electrodynamics: A superconducting quantum switch, Phys. Rev. B 78, 104508 (2008).

18 [6] M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cam- bridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2001). [7] P. W. Shor, in Proceedings of the 35th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (IEEE Computer Society Press, Santa Fe, NM, 1994). [8] M. Hillery, V. Buzék, and A. Berthiaume, Quantum secret sharing, Phys. Rev. A 59, 1829 (1999). [9] S. Bose, V. Vedral, and P. L. Knight, Multiparticle generalization of entanglement swapping, Phys. Rev. A 57, 822 (1998). [10] R. Cleve, D. Gottesman, and H. K. Lo, How to Share a Quantum Secret, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 648 (1999). [11] C. P. Yang, Shih I. Chu, and S. Han, Efficient many-party controlled teleportation of multi- qubit quantum, Phys. Rev. A 70, 022329 (2004). [12] D. P. DiVincenzo and P. W. Shor, Fault-Tolerant Error Correction with Efficient Quantum Codes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3260 (1996). [13] J. Preskill, Reliable quantum computers, Proc. R. Soc. London A 454, 385 (1998). [14] V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Quantum-enhanced measurements: Beating the standard quantum Limit, Science 306, 1330 (2004). [15] J. J. Bollinger, W. M. Itano, D. J. Wineland, and D. J. Heinzen, Optimal frequency measurements with maximally correlated states, Phys. Rev. A 54, 4649 (1996). [16] S. F. Huelga, C. Macchiavello, T. Pellizzari, A. K. Ekert, M. B. Plenio, and J. I. Cirac, Improvement of frequency standards with quantum entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 3865 (1997). [17] T. Monz, P. Schindler, J. T. Barreiro, M. Chwalla, D. Nigg, W. A. Coish, M. Harlander, W. Hansel, M. Hennrich, and R. Blatt, 14-Qubit Entanglement: Creation and Coherence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 130506 (2011). [18] A. Omran, H. Levine, A. Keesling, G. Semeghini, T. T. Wang, S. Ebadi, H. Bernien, A. S. Zibrov, H. Pichler, S. Choi et al., Generation and manipulation of Schrödinger cat states in Rydberg atom arrays, Science 365, 570 (2019). [19] H. S. Zhong, Y. Li, W. Li, L. C. Peng, Z. E. Su, Y. Hu, Y. M. He, X. Ding, W. J. Zhang, Hao Li, et al., 12-photon entanglement and scalable scattershot boson sampling with optimal entangled-photon pairs from parametric down-conversion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 250505

19 (2018). [20] X.-L. Wang, Y.-H. Luo, H.-L. Huang, M.-C. Chen, Z.-E. Su, C. Liu, C. Chen, W. Li, Y.-Q. Fang, X. Jiang, et al., 18-qubit entanglement with six Photons’ three degrees of freedom, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 260502 (2018). [21] C. Song, K. Xu, W. Liu, C.-p. Yang, S.-B. Zheng, H. Deng, Q. Xie, K. Huang, Q. Guo, L. Zhang, et al., 10-qubit entanglement and parallel logic operations with a superconducting circuit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 180511 (2017). [22] C. Song, K. Xu, H. Li, Y. Zhang, X. Zhang, W. Liu, Q. Guo, Z. Wang, W. Ren, J. Hao, H. Feng, H. Fan, D. Zheng, D. Wang, H. Wang, and S. Zhu, Observation of multi-component atomic Schrödinger cat states of up to 20 qubits, Science 365, 574 (2019). [23] J. I. Cirac and P. Zoller, Preparation of macroscopic superpositions in many-atom systems, Phys. Rev. A 50, R2799 (1994). [24] C. C. Gerry, Preparation of multiatom entangled states through dispersive atom–cavity-field interactions, Phys. Rev. A 53, 2857 (1996). [25] S. B. Zheng, One-Step Synthesis of Multiatom Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger States, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 230404 (2001). [26] S. B. Zheng, Quantum-information processing and multiatom-entanglement engineering with a thermal cavity, Phys. Rev. A 66, 060303 (2002). [27] L. M. Duan and H. Kimble, Efficient Engineering of Multiatom Entanglement through Single- Photon Detections, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 253601 (2003). [28] X. Wang, M. Feng, and B. C. Sanders, Multipartite entangled states in coupled quantum dots and cavity QED, Phys. Rev. A 67, 022302 (2003). [29] S. L. Zhu, Z. D. Wang, and P. Zanardi, Geometric quantum computation and multiqubit entanglement with superconducting qubits inside a cavity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 100502 (2005). [30] W. Feng, P. Wang, X. Ding, L. Xu, and X. Q. Li, Generating and stabilizing the Greenberger- Horne-Zeilinger state in circuit QED: Joint measurement, Zeno effect, and feedback, Phys. Rev. A 83, 042313 (2011). [31] S. Aldana, Y. D. Wang, and C. Bruder, Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger generation protocol for N superconducting transmon qubits capacitively coupled to a quantum bus, Phys. Rev. B 84, 134519 (2011). [32] J. Cho, D. G. Angelakis, and S. Bose, Heralded generation of entanglement with coupled

20 cavities, Phys. Rev. A 78, 022323 (2008). [33] S. B. Zheng, C. P. Yang, and F. Nori, Arbitrary control of coherent dynamics for distant qubits in a quantum network, Phys. Rev. A 82, 042327 (2010) [34] C. P. Yang, Q. P. Su, and F. Nori, Entanglement generation and quantum information transfer between spatially-separated qubits in different cavities, New J. Phys. 15, 115003 (2013). [35] X. L. He, Q. P. Su, F. Y. Zhang, and C. P. Yang, Generating multipartite entangled states of qubits distributed in different cavities, Quantum Inf. Process. 13, 1381 (2014). [36] S. Liu, R. Yu, J. Li, and Y. Wu, Generation of a multi-qubit W entangled state through spatially separated semiconductor quantum-dot-molecules in cavity-quantum electrodynamics arrays, J. Applied Phys. 115, 134312 (2014). [37] X. B. Huang, Z. R. Zhong, and Y. H. Chen, Generation of multi-atom entangled states in coupled cavities via transitionless quantum driving, Quantum Inf. Process. 14, 4475 (2015). [38] C. P. Yang, Q. P. Su, S. B. Zheng, and F. Nori, Entangling superconducting qubits in a multi-cavity system, New J. Phys. 18, 013025 (2016). [39] X. B. Huang, Y. H. Chen, and Z. Wang, Fast generation of three-qubit Greenberger-Horne- Zeilinger state based on the Lewis-Riesenfeld invariants in coupled cavities, Sci Rep. 6, 25707 (2016). [40] M. Izadyari, M. Saadati-Niari, R. Khadem-Hosseini, and M. Amniat-Talab, Creation of N- atom GHZ state in atom-cavity-fiber system by multi-state adiabatic passage, Opt. Quant. Electron 48, 71 (2016). [41] Y. H. Kang, Y. H. Chen, Q. C. Wu, B. H. Huang, J. Song, and Y. Xia, Fast generation of W states of superconducting qubits with multiple Schröinger dynamics, Sci Rep. 6, 36737 (2016). [42] X. T. Mo and Z. Y. Xue, Single-step multipartite entangled states generation from coupled circuit cavities, Frontiers of Physics 14, 31602 (2019). [43] P. J. Leek, S. Filipp, P. Maurer, M. Baur, R. Bianchetti, J. M. Fink, M. Goppl, L. Steffen, and A. Wallraff, Using sideband transitions for two-qubit operations in superconducting circuits, Phys. Rev. B 79, 180511 (2009). [44] M. Neeley, M. Ansmann, R. C. Bialczak, M. Hofheinz, N. Katz, E. Lucero, A. O’Connell, H. Wang, A. N. Cleland, and J. M. Martinis, Process tomography of quantum memory in a Josephson-phase qubit coupled to a two-level state, Nat. Phys. 4, 523 (2008). [45] Z. L. Xiang, X. Y. Lu, T. F. Li, J. Q. You, and F. Nori, Hybrid quantum circuit consisting

21 of a superconducting flux qubit coupled to a spin ensemble and a transmission-line resonator. Phys. Rev. B 87, 144516 (2013). [46] P. Neumann, et al., Excited-state spectroscopy of single NV defects in diamond using optically detected magnetic resonance. New J. Phys. 11, 013017 (2009). [47] P. Pradhan, M. P. Anantram, and K. L. Wang, Quantum computation by optically coupled steady atoms/quantum-dots inside a quantum electro-dynamic cavity, arXiv:quant-ph/0002006. [48] M. Brune, E. Hagley, J. Dreyer, X. Maitre, A. Maali, C. Wunderlich, J. M. Raimond, and S. Haroche, Observing the progressive decoherence of the “Meter” in a quantum measurement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 4887 (1996). [49] M. Sandberg, C. M. Wilson, F. Persson, T. Bauch, G. Johansson, V. Shumeiko, T. Duty, and P. Delsing, Tuning the field in a microwave resonator faster than the photon lifetime, Appl. Phys. Lett. 92, 203501 (2008). [50] Z. L. Wang, Y. P. Zhong, L. J. He, H. Wang, J. M. Martinis, A. N. Cleland, and Q. W. Xie, Quantum state characterization of a fast tunable superconducting resonator, Appl. Phys. Lett. 102, 163503 (2013). [51] S. B. Zheng and G. C. Guo, Efficient scheme for two-atom entanglement and quantum information processing in cavity QED, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 2392 (2000). [52] A. Sørensen and K. Mølmer, Quantum computation with ions in thermal motion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 1971 (1999). [53] D. F. V. James and J. Jerke, Effective Hamiltonian theory and its applications in quantum information, Can. J. Phys. 85, 625 (2007). [54] C. P. Yang, S. I. Chu, and S. Han, Possible realization of entanglement, logical gates, and quantum information transfer with superconducting-quantuminterference-device qubits in cavity QED, Phys. Rev. A 67, 042311 (2003). [55] J. Q. You and F. Nori, Quantum information processing with superconducting qubits in a microwave field, Phys. Rev. B 68, 064509 (2003). [56] A. Blais, R. S. Huang, A. Wallra, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Cavity quantum electrodynamics for superconducting electrical circuits: An architecture for quantum computation, Phys. Rev. A 69, 062320 (2004). [57] J. Clarke and F. K. Wilhelm, Superconducting quantum bits, Nature (London) 453, 1031

22 (2008). [58] J. Q. You and F. Nori, Atomic physics and quantum optics using superconducting circuits, Nature (London) 474, 589 (2011). [59] Z. L. Xiang, S. Ashhab, J. Q. You, and F. Nori, Hybrid quantum circuits: Superconducting circuits interacting with other quantum systems, Rev. Mod. Phys. 85(2), 623 (2013). [60] X. Gu, A. F. Kockum, A. Miranowicz, Y. X. Liu, and F. Nori, Microwave photonics with superconducting quantum circuits, Phys. Rep. 718–719, 1 (2017). [61] I. C. Hoi, C. M. Wilson, G. Johansson, T. Palomaki, B. Peropadre, and P. Delsing, Demon stration of a single-photon router in the microwave regime, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 073601 (2011). [62] J. Koch, T. M. Yu, J. Gambetta, A. A. Houck, D. I. Schuster, J. Majer, A. Blais, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Charge-insensitive qubit design derived from the Cooper pair box, Phys. Rev. A 76, 042319 (2007). [63] C. P. Yang, Q. P. Su, and S. Han, Generation of Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger entangled states of photons in multiple cavities via a superconducting qutrit or an atom through resonant interaction, Phys. Rev. A 86, 022329 (2012). [64] For a transmon qutrit, the 0 2 transition is much weaker than those of the 0 1 | i ↔ | i | i ↔ | i 1 1 1 and 1 2 transitions. Thus, we have γ− γ− , γ− . | i ↔ | i 20 ≫ 10 21 [65] C. Wang, Y. Y. Gao, P. Reinhold, R. W. Heeres, N. Ofek, K. Chou, C. Axline, M. Reagor, J. Blumoff, K. M. Sliwa, L. Frunzio, S. M. Girvin, L. Jiang, M. Mirrahimi, M. H. Devoret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, A Schrödinger cat living in two boxes, Science 352, 1087 (2016). [66] M. J. Peterer, S. J. Bader, X. Jin, F. Yan, A. Kamal, T. J. Gudmundsen, P. J. Leek, T. P. Orlando, W. D. Oliver, and S. Gustavsson, Coherence and decay of higher energy levels of a superconducting transmon qubit Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 010501 (2015). [67] M. Baur, A. Fedorov, L. Steffen, S. Filipp, M. P. da Silva, and A. Wallraff, Benchmark- ing a quantum teleportation protocol in superconducting circuits using tomography and an entanglement witness, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 040502 (2012). [68] A. Fedorov, L. Steffen, M. Baur, M. P. da Silva, and A. Wallraff, Implementation of a Toffoli gate with superconducting circuits, Nature (London) 481, 170 (2012). [69] W. Chen, D. A. Bennett, V. Patel, and J. E. Lukens, Substrate and process dependent losses in superconducting thin film resonators, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 21, 075013 (2008).

23 [70] P. J. Leek, M. Baur, J. M. Fink, R. Bianchetti, L. Steﬀen, S. Filipp, and A. Wallraﬀ, Cavity quantum electrodynamics with separate photon storage and qubit readout modes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 100504 (2010). APPENDIX: PREPARATION OF THE GHZ STATE OF THE FOUR TLRs

The ladder-type three levels of each of the coupler qutrits (q1, q2, q3) in Fig. 4 are labeled as g , e , and f with energy E < E < E . Initially, q is in the state ( e + f ) /√2, | i | i | i g e f 1 | i | i q and q are in the ground state g , and each TLR is in a vacuum state. In addition, 2 3 | i assume that q1, q2 and q3 are decoupled from their neighbor TLRs. Previously, we have set

ωc1 = ωc3 and ωc2 = ωc4 in Fig. 4, i.e., every two neighbor TLRs have diﬀerent frequencies. The procedure for preparing the GHZ state 0 0 1 1 + 1 1 0 0 /√2 | ic1 | ic2 | ic3 | ic4 | ic1 | ic2 | ic3 | ic4 of the four TLRs is listed as follows: Step 1: Adjust the level spacings of q such that TLR 2 is resonant with the g 2 | i ↔ e transition of q , with a coupling constant µ . After an interaction time π/ (2µ ) (i.e., | i 2 1 1 half a Rabi oscillation), the state e 0 changes to i g 1 . Hence, the initial state | iq2 | ic2 − | iq2 | ic2 1 e + f 0 0 of the system, composed of (q , TLR 2 and TLR 3), becomes √2 | iq2 | iq2 | ic2 | ic3 2 1 i g 1 + f 0 0 . (23) √2 − | iq2 | ic2 | iq2 | ic2 | ic3 (In the following, the normalization factor 1 will be omitted for simplicity). Then, adjust √2 the level spacings of q2 such that q2 is decoupled from TLR 2. Now apply a classical pulse (resonant with the g e transition) to q to pump the state g back to the state e . | i↔| i 2 | i | i Thus, the state (23) changes to

i e 1 + f 0 0 . (24) − | iq2 | ic2 | iq2 | ic2 | ic3 Step 2: Adjust the level spacings of q such that TLR 2 is resonant with the g e 2 | i↔| i transition of q2 again. After an interaction time π/ 2√2µ1 , we have the transformation e 1 i g 2 while the state f 0 remains unchanged. Hence, the state | iq2 | ic2 → − | iq2 | ic2 | iq2 | ic2 (24) becomes g 2 + f 0 0 . (25) −| iq2 | ic2 | iq2 | ic2 | ic3 Then, adjust the level spacings of q2 such that q2 is decoupled from TLR 2. Step 3: Adjust the level spacings of q such that TLR 3 is resonant with the e f 2 | i↔| i transition of q2, with a coupling constant µ2. After an interaction time π/ (2µ2), the state

24 f 0 changes to i e 1 . Thus, the state (25) becomes | iq2 | ic3 − | iq2 | ic3 g 2 0 + i e 0 1 . (26) | iq2 | ic2 | ic3 | iq2 | ic2 | ic3

Then, adjust the level spacings of q2 such that q2 is decoupled from TLR 3. Now apply a classical pulse (resonant with the e f transition) to q to pump the state e back to | i↔| i 2 | i the state f . Thus, the state (26) changes to | i

g 2 0 + i f 0 1 . (27) | iq2 | ic2 | ic3 | iq2 | ic2 | ic3 Step 4: Apply a classical pulse (resonant with the g e transition) to q to pump | i↔| i 2 the state g to the state e . Thus, the state (27) changes to | i | i

e 2 0 + i f 0 1 . (28) | iq2 | ic2 | ic3 | iq2 | ic2 | ic3 Then, adjust the level spacings of q such that TLR 3 is resonant with the e f transition 2 | i↔| i of q again. After an interaction time π/ 2√2µ , one has the transformation f 1 2 2 | iq2 | ic3 → i e 2 while the state e 0 remains unchanged. Thus, the state (28) changes to − | iq2 | ic3 | iq2 | ic3

2 0 + 0 2 e . (29) | ic2 | ic3 | ic2 | ic3 | iq2

The, adjust the level spacings of q2 such that q2 is decoupled from TLR 3.

From the description given above, one can see that TLR 2 is decoupled from q2 during the operation of steps (3) and (4). In addition, it is noted that the initial states of TLRs 1, 4 and coupler qutrits q , q in Fig. 4 remain unchanged because they are not involved { } { 1 3} during each operation of steps (1) (4) above. Thus, based on Eq. (29), the state of the − whole system after the above 4-step operation is

2 0 + 0 2 e g g 0 0 . (30) | ic2 | ic3 | ic2 | ic3 | iq2 | iq1 | iq3 | ic1 | ic4 The purpose of the remaining operations, described below, is to transfer one photon from

TLR 2 to TLR 1 via q1 and one photon from TLR 3 to TLR 4 via q3. Step 5: Adjust the level spacings of q such that TLR 2 is resonant with the g e 1 | i↔| i transition of q1,with a coupling constant µ3 After an interaction time π/ 2√2µ3 , the state g 2 i e 1 while the state g 0 remains unchanged. Thus, the state (30) | iq1 | ic2 → − | iq1 | ic2 | iq1 | ic2 becomes i 1 0 e + 0 2 g e g 0 0 . (31) − | ic2 | ic3 | iq1 | ic2 | ic3 | iq1 | iq2 | iq3 | ic1 | ic4 25 Then, adjust the level spacings of q1 such that TLR 2 is decoupled from q1 but TLR 1 is resonant with the g e transition of q , with a coupling constant µ . After an interaction | i↔| i 1 4 time π/ (2µ ) , we have the transformation e 0 i g 1 while the state g 0 4 | iq1 | ic1 → − | iq1 | ic1 | iq1 | ic1 remains unchanged. Hence, the state (31) changes to

1 1 0 + 0 0 2 g e g 0 . (32) −| ic1 | ic2 | ic3 | ic1 | ic2 | ic3 | iq1 | iq2 | iq3 | ic4 Then, adjust the level spacings of q1 such that both TLRs 1 and 2 are decoupled from q1. Step 6: Adjust the level spacings of q such that TLR 3 is resonant with the g e 3 | i↔| i transition of q3, with a coupling constant µ5. After an interaction time π/ 2√2µ5 , the state g 2 i e 1 while the state g 0 remains unchanged. Thus, the state (32) | iq3 | ic3 → − | iq3 | ic3 | iq3 | ic3 becomes

1 1 0 g + i 0 0 1 e g e 0 . (33) | ic1 | ic2 | ic3 | iq3 | ic1 | ic2 | ic3 | iq3 | iq1 | iq2 | ic4 Then, adjust the level spacings of q3 such that TLR 3 is decoupled from q3 but TLR 4 is resonant with the g e transition of q , with a coupling constant µ . After an interaction | i↔| i 3 6 time π/ (2µ ) , we have the transformation e 0 i g 1 while the state g 0 6 | iq3 | ic4 → − | iq3 | ic4 | iq3 | ic4 remains unchanged. Therefore, the state (33) becomes

1 1 0 0 + 0 0 1 1 g e g . (34) | ic1 | ic2 | ic3 | ic4 | ic1 | ic2 | ic3 | ic4 | iq1 | iq2 | iq3 Then, adjust the level spacings of q3 such that both TLRs 3 and 4 are decoupled from q3. Eq. (34) shows that the four TLRs are prepared in the GHZ state 0 0 1 1 + 1 1 0 0 /√2, while the three coupler qutrits (q , q , q ) are | ic1 | ic2 | ic3 | ic4 | ic1 | ic2 | ic3 | ic4 1 2 3 disentangled from the four TLRs. Since each step of operation employs the resonant qutrit-cavity or qutrit-pulse interaction, the GHZ state of the four TLRs can be fast prepared within a short time.